Saw a new Eclipse today
#3
Originally Posted by The Sarlacc
Bright red, sitting right in front of the dealer.
This thing is UGLY, nuff said. Good-bye Mitsu.
This thing is UGLY, nuff said. Good-bye Mitsu.
#4
Originally Posted by youngTL
I wouldn't exactly call it quits for Mitsu yet...do you know how many 20-something women will buy those? I'm guessing quite a bit. And speaking of cougars, I think that's exactly this car's target audience
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...=123048&page=7
There has been rumors about Mitsu pulling out of the US market for awhile now...
https://acurazine.com/forums/automotive-news-6/mitsubishi-sales-marketing-financial-news-297235/
#7
Originally Posted by GreenMonster
Trending Topics
#8
Originally Posted by GreenMonster
They've got problems...
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...=123048&page=7
There has been rumors about Mitsu pulling out of the US market for awhile now...
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=297235
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...=123048&page=7
There has been rumors about Mitsu pulling out of the US market for awhile now...
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=297235
#13
i saw a red one on the highway today!!! UGLY. i was pointing and laughing at the driver.. apparently the 17/18 year old girl looked very confused on why i was laughing. but she also looked kinda dumb so i guess she always look like that. she's gotta be pretty dumb to buy one anyways.
#14
god i can't stand cars where you can't tell whether they are coming or going....... hey Mitsu - ever heard of a REAR END???????
the new Eclipse looks like a mix between a Pontiac Sunfire and a Audi TT. Way to totally ruin what used to be a good thing, Mitsu. Give me a 1992 Eclipse GSX over this horrendous thing....
the new Eclipse looks like a mix between a Pontiac Sunfire and a Audi TT. Way to totally ruin what used to be a good thing, Mitsu. Give me a 1992 Eclipse GSX over this horrendous thing....
#16
I like it better better than the previous one with the multi-ridge door. I can't understand how they can change close to $30k for a little ass coupe. The power is very nice with a low 14 sec 1/4 mile and a braking distance from 60-0 of 14234124 seconds with the broken brakes.
#18
Originally Posted by dondos2
(about Mitsu not making good cars.........)
Ive had 3 gens of Mirages/ lancers and i havent had a single problem with any of them...
Ive had 3 gens of Mirages/ lancers and i havent had a single problem with any of them...
#20
Originally Posted by Doom878
I like it better better than the previous one with the multi-ridge door. I can't understand how they can change close to $30k for a little ass coupe. The power is very nice with a low 14 sec 1/4 mile and a braking distance from 60-0 of 14234124 seconds with the broken brakes.
#22
Originally Posted by youngTL
How much does the Accord EX-V6 6spd coupe come out to down there in comparison?
Headroom with Sunroof (in.,front/rear): 37.5/34.6
Legroom (in., front/rear): 42.8/29.2
Shoulder Room (in., front/rear): 54.2/51.2
Hip Room (in., front/rear): 53.7/44.4
Cargo Volume (cu. ft): 15.7
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.): 81.6 (80.2 with sunroof)
Accord: $26,950 MSRP
Headroom (in., front/rear) 37.5 / 36.1
Legroom (in., front/rear) 43.1 / 31.9
Shoulder Room (in., front/rear) 56.1 / 55.4
Hiproom (in., front/rear) 54.2 / 46.1
Cargo Volume (cu. ft.) 12.8
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.) 88.0
The Accord is a little cheaper even though I would never pay the MSRP. The Accord is a tad roomier then the new Eclipse. I'm not sure if the 3G was more roomy than the 2G, but the 2G sure was tiny. The Eclipse does own in warranty but they might not last the 10 yrs.
#23
Originally Posted by Doom878
Eclipse: Similarly equipped as Accord $26,969 MSRP
Headroom with Sunroof (in.,front/rear): 37.5/34.6
Legroom (in., front/rear): 42.8/29.2
Shoulder Room (in., front/rear): 54.2/51.2
Hip Room (in., front/rear): 53.7/44.4
Cargo Volume (cu. ft): 15.7
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.): 81.6 (80.2 with sunroof)
Accord: $26,950 MSRP
Headroom (in., front/rear) 37.5 / 36.1
Legroom (in., front/rear) 43.1 / 31.9
Shoulder Room (in., front/rear) 56.1 / 55.4
Hiproom (in., front/rear) 54.2 / 46.1
Cargo Volume (cu. ft.) 12.8
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.) 88.0
The Accord is a little cheaper even though I would never pay the MSRP. The Accord is a tad roomier then the new Eclipse. I'm not sure if the 3G was more roomy than the 2G, but the 2G sure was tiny. The Eclipse does own in warranty but they might not last the 10 yrs.
Headroom with Sunroof (in.,front/rear): 37.5/34.6
Legroom (in., front/rear): 42.8/29.2
Shoulder Room (in., front/rear): 54.2/51.2
Hip Room (in., front/rear): 53.7/44.4
Cargo Volume (cu. ft): 15.7
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.): 81.6 (80.2 with sunroof)
Accord: $26,950 MSRP
Headroom (in., front/rear) 37.5 / 36.1
Legroom (in., front/rear) 43.1 / 31.9
Shoulder Room (in., front/rear) 56.1 / 55.4
Hiproom (in., front/rear) 54.2 / 46.1
Cargo Volume (cu. ft.) 12.8
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.) 88.0
The Accord is a little cheaper even though I would never pay the MSRP. The Accord is a tad roomier then the new Eclipse. I'm not sure if the 3G was more roomy than the 2G, but the 2G sure was tiny. The Eclipse does own in warranty but they might not last the 10 yrs.
#24
Yeah I think the fastest 6mt over at www.v6p.net hit 14.0 all motor with i/e/springs.
#28
Originally Posted by The Sarlacc
All you guys that think this new one looks better then the previous one........I dont know what youre smoking. This new is that fucking horrendous.
#30
Originally Posted by The Sarlacc
All you guys that think this new one looks better then the previous one........I dont know what youre smoking. This new is that fucking horrendous.
looks better than this?:
Your stash > my stash
Seriously, both look so horrendous that if Mitsu reintroduced the 2G I'd give the to them.
#32
Originally Posted by F23A4
So you think this:
looks better than this?:
Seriously, both look so horrendous that if Mitsu reintroduced the 2G I'd give the to them.
looks better than this?:
Seriously, both look so horrendous that if Mitsu reintroduced the 2G I'd give the to them.
The new one looks so misproportioned and bulbous. At the last gen looks a little more sleek.
Neither of those offer the handling performance of the 2nd gen either, that sucks as well.
#36
Originally Posted by The Sarlacc
Neither of those offer the handling performance of the 2nd gen either, that sucks as well.
#38
Originally Posted by Doom878
Hey where'd you hear that? Is it becasue of the heavy V6 in the front?